With the advent of minimally invasive techniques and other medical devices, laparoscopic liver resection (LLR) has been a common procedure since 1992. Once experts in liver surgery established the “Louisville Statement”, a set of guidelines for the rapidly growing area of minimally invasive liver resection [1], the number of reported LLRs has increased consistently. Although minor LLRs have been performed routinely in clinical practice, reports of major and anatomic LLRs have increased sharply [1,2]. Some specialized centers have reported favorable and competitive outcomes of LLR compared to those of open liver resection [3,4,5]. Recently, several reports about single-port LLR, robotic-assisted liver resection, and LLR via video-assisted transthoracic liver resection (VTLR) have been published [6].
Patients Who Underwent Intervention-Guided Fluorescence Imaging Technique (n = 24) | |||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|
p | |||||
Age | 55.3 (49–63) | ||||
Operation time (min) | 221 (143–275) | 265 (200–300) | <0.001 | ||
Sex ratio (Male: Female) | 2:1 | ||||
Time to the first semi-fluid diet (days) | 2.4 (1–4) | 2.8 (1–5) | 0.222 | Liver disease | |
Transfusion a | 3 (13%) | 4 (13.8%) | 0.758 | Hepatitis B | 21 (87.5%) |
Blood loss (cc) | 200 (10–1100) | 215 (5–1300) | 0.438 | Hepatitis C | 1 (4.2%) |
Hospital stay (days) | 10.2 (6–14) | 10.0 (6–15) | 0.556 | Alcoholic hepatitis | 2 (8.3%) |
Resection margin (cm) | 1.03 (0.3–2.0) | 1.01(0.2–3.0) | 0.587 | ICG 15 (%) | 12.4 (8.9–15.2) |
Tumor size | 2.73 (0.70–3.40) | AFP (ng/mL) | 166 (3.2–200) | ||
2.51 (0.5–3.5) | 0.412 | Platelets, ×103/mm3 | 143 (121–182) | ||
INR | 1.05 (0.89–1.38) | ||||
Total bilirubin (mg/dl) | 1.03 (0.8–1.3) | ||||
Albumin (g/dL) | 3.88 (3.7–4.2) | ||||
CTP score | A | 20 (83.3%) | |||
B | 4 (16.7%) | ||||
Tumor location | |||||
IV | 6 (6 LLR) | ||||
V | 5 (5 LLR) | ||||
VI | 4 (4 LLR) | ||||
VII | 5 (3 LLR, 2 VTLR) | ||||
VIII | 4 (2 LLR, 2 VTLR) |
IFIT (n = 24) | Internal Controls (n = 29) |
---|